conducts hearing in Illinois

2017Harrison, 348 Ill.

2016Harrison, 348 Ill.

2026First, the court conducts a hearing to determine if “the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient safeguards of reliability.” Id. § 115-10(b)(1).

2026First, the court conducts a hearing to determine if “the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient safeguards of reliability.” Id. § 115-10(b)(1).

2024People v. Riggs, 2019 IL App (2d) 160991, ¶ 26 ; 725 ILCS 5/115-10(a), (b)(2) (West 2018). ¶ 36 Butler argues that K.P.’s trial testimony failed to satisfy the statute’s condition for admissibility.

2021People v. Riggs, 2019 IL App (2d) 160991, ¶ 26 ; see also 725 ILCS 5/115-10(a), (b)(2)(B) (West 2016).

2021Id. § 115-10(b)(2)(B). ¶ 38 After careful review, we conclude that the admission of N.B.’s out-of-court statements (i.e., the statements N.B. made during the videotaped CAC interview and the statements she made to her parents), including those portions where N.B. accused 16 defendant of exposing his penis to her, complied with the requirements of section 115-10.

2021Id. ¶ 35 Section 115-10 of the Code provides that, in a prosecution for a sexual act perpetrated against a child under the age of 13, certain out-of-court statements made by the child victim may be admitted at trial as an exception to the hearsay rule where (1) the trial court conducts a hearing outside the presence of the jury to determine the reliability of the statements and (2) the victim testifies at trial or is unavailable but evidence corroborating the statement is presented.

2018Specifically, under section 8-2601 of the Code, the following two requirements must be satisfied to admit an out-of-court statement made by a child under the age of 13 involving an unlawful sexual act: (1) the court conducts a hearing outside the jury’s presence and finds that the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient safeguards of reliability and (2) the child either (a) testifies at the proceeding or (b) is unavailable as a witness and there is corroborative evidence of the act that is the subject of the hearsay statement. 735 ILCS 5/8-2601(a) (West 2016); Coun

2017Specifically, under section 8-2601 of the Code, the following two requirements must be satisfied to admit an out-of-court statement made by a child under the age of 13 involving an unlawful sexual act: (1) the court conducts a hearing outside the jury's presence and finds that the time, content, and circumstances of the statement provide sufficient safeguards of reliability and (2) the child either (a) testifies at the proceeding or (b) is unavailable as a witness and there is corroborative evidence of the act that is the subject of the hearsay statement. 735 ILCS 5/82601(a) (West 2016); Count

2025Therefore, there are only two possible outcomes when a court conducts the inquiry: “(1) the court appoints new counsel who should then conduct an independent evaluation of the defendant’s ineffective assistance claims and take whatever action counsel thinks would be appropriate or (2) the court does not appoint new counsel and posttrial matters proceed as in any other case.” Harkey, 2025 IL App (4th) 230523, ¶ 72 . ¶ 53 The record shows the trial court’s inquiry was a preliminary Krankel inquiry.

2023App. 3d 605, 607-08 (1977)). ¶ 23 The defendant argues that this case is analogous to People v. Adams, 2016 IL App (1st) 141135 .

2011People v. Burns, 209 Ill.2d 551, 560 , 283 Ill.Dec. 914 , 809 N.E.2d 107 (2004). ¶ 54 Section 115-10 of the Code provides that, in a prosecution for a physical or sexual act perpetrated upon or against a child under the age of 13, certain out-of-court statements made by the child may be admitted at trial as an exception to the hearsay rule where (1) the trial court conducts a hearing outside the presence of the jury to determine the reliability of the statements; and (2) the child testifies at trial or is unavailable and there is corroborative evidence of the act that is the subject of the sta

2011People v. Burns, 209 Ill.2d 551, 560 , 283 Ill.Dec. 914 , 809 N.E.2d 107 (2004). ¶ 54 Section 115-10 of the Code provides that, in a prosecution for a physical or sexual act perpetrated upon or against a child under the age of 13, certain out-of-court statements made by the child may be admitted at trial as an exception to the hearsay rule where (1) the trial court conducts a hearing outside the presence of the jury to determine the reliability of the statements; and (2) the child testifies at trial or is unavailable and there is corroborative evidence of the act that is the subject of the sta

2009Moore, 207 Ill. 2d at 81 (remanded “for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to conduct the required preliminary investigation”); Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d at 189 (remanded for a new hearing on defendant’s pro se posttrial motion based on ineffectiveness of trial counsel, with appointed counsel different than trial counsel).

2009Moore, 207 Ill. 2d at 81 (remanded “for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court to conduct the required preliminary investigation”); Krankel, 102 Ill. 2d at 189 (remanded for a new hearing on defendant’s pro se posttrial motion based on ineffectiveness of trial counsel, with appointed counsel different than trial counsel).

2006Although no statute sets forth when a hearing on a motion to suppress filed before trial must take place, defendant claims People v. Flatt, 82 Ill. 2d 250 , 412 N.E.2d 509 (1980), and People v. Pugh, 133 Ill.

2006Although no statute sets forth when a hearing on a motion to suppress filed before trial must take place, defendant claims People v. Flatt, 82 Ill. 2d 250 , 412 N.E.2d 509 (1980), and People v. Pugh, 133 Ill.

2006Although no statute sets forth when a hearing on a motion to suppress filed before trial must take place, defendant claims People v. Flatt, 82 Ill. 2d 250 , 412 N.E.2d 509 (1980), and People v. Pugh, 133 Ill.